Chapter 5- Conclusion and Recommendations
5.2 Summary of the Findings and Analysis
In understanding migration decision making process in a household, it is said that when household member/s migrate, the households often act collectively in making migration decision. In this case individuals are not in position to make migration decisions but the decision to migrate is made by the household in the context of what is best for the entire household. Migration is a frequently used strategy for household’s survival and improved livelihoods. It was discovered that when households lack means of survival, they send their members elsewhere to secure income as means of the household’s survival.
Likewise even the household members if they see the need to leave the household for employment and send remittances they do migrate but before migrating they consult their families. Thus most migrants migrate for their households and they migrate after the household has engaged in a discussion about migration and calculated the risks, costs and benefits of migration. When the benefits are higher than the risks, possibly households decides for their member/s to migrate. The intention of engaging as a household in decision is to ensure that migration offer positive returns and respond to lack of employment and income generating activities in rural areas. Hence households expects a lot from migration, remittances per se, are one of the returns or benefits of migration to migrant household.
Employment is one of the central means of generating income for families, so as there are no or limited
generating income elsewhere by sending their members and then receive remittances. However some people decide on their own to migrate without consulting their households. Households do not consider this as a problem because they believe in that at some point it can be valuable to the household. This means other people migrate for their own reasons not for the entire family reasons but their migration is beneficial to their families due that they migrate and provide their families when struggling financially.
Moreover the environment where households are located also influence migration and its decisions in households. Various households use migration to generate income and as a result other households often join the process of migration. On the other hand migration decisions in the community of Endingeni rural area tend to be bias as in most cases households prefer male members to migrate rather than females. This is associated with that they usually consider what is best for the family, so even the migration of a male person instead of a female is considered as best. Consequently, male members from several households migrate and send remittances that become the household’s key source of income.
In understanding the household’s source of income and the contribution of remittances to overall sources of income. The ease migrant households experience in migration is that they receive remittances, which have come to be the important source of income. When migrant members migrate for employment they share the portion of their earnings with their households in the area of origin. These received remittances empower households to meet and afford their basic needs. This reflects that before remittances households were struggling to meet their basic needs, hence remittances came to be a rescue. In other households remittances are the main source of income while in other households are not the main income but rather form a major contribution to household’s overall income.
Remittances are a rescue to households who face difficulties in generating income or to those households who do not have stable or proper sources of income. Although remittances are the central or major source of income in many households, it appeared that a number of households within the country of South Africa largely depend on government social grants. Social grants such as old age pension grant, child support grant as well foster care grant are the second most source of income in South African households following the income from salaries which also include remittances. It is clear that remittances and social grants are leading sources of income in many households.
Furthermore other remittance receiving households do not depend on remitted funds but rather on social grants. For instance other migrant households revealed that although they receive remittances however remittances do not meet all their needs but their contribution worth a lot to the household income and it does make a difference. Thus social grants are mentioned as the most significant source of income which also rescued the household even before the incident of migration. Also when migrants experience
difficulties in destination and become unable to remit, social grants safeguard the households. Social grants and remittances plays an integral part in households, thus they shape household expenditure.
In response to the research question, of what is the impact of remittances in household expenditure?
Migrant households are optimistic with regards to migration and remittances since migration and remittances positively affect them. Families expect a lot from migration and thus it does provide and enable to them to overcome their financial constraints and contingencies as well as to improve their livelihoods. Participants and their households appreciate migration for their livelihoods as remittances.
Remittances contributed to improved livelihoods in migrant households and it was found that remittance receiving households tend to have better living standards than their counterparts. It is clear that migration and remittances has become a means of survival to sustain the livelihoods in many migrant households.
Remittances are associated with poverty alleviation because remitted funds are used in household expenditure such as consumption and investment. Households use remittances to cover the basic needs such as food, education and infrastructure. It appeared that most households spend remittances on food which is the major basic need of every household. And for that reason remittances reduce poverty and are associated with increased household income that allow households to meet their basic needs. This means in absence of migration and remittances it would be difficult for households to meet their primary goods and improve their livelihoods, nonetheless remittances have become an essential mechanism for households who want to satisfy their needs.
Additionally, migrant household use remittances mostly for consumptive purposes as they spend them on food and housing while covering these basic needs contribute to good health of household members.
Remittances also are spent on goods and services that results in good health condition of household members. Moreover remittance receiving households also educate their children with these remitted funds. Which means they also invest remittances in education which may somehow yields positive returns in the household in future. Consequently migration and remittances process may always be perceived as good although at some point it doesn’t satisfy the household.
In response to how does the family perceive migration and remittances and the relationship with their migrant? The perceptions are that migration and remittances is important and valuable to the household.
Migration and remittances are highly appreciated due to their positive effects on the household and its wellbeing. Through the incident of migration, it is said that remittances uplift poor households who are unable to afford although at some point it is associated with separating families.
In many migrant households, migration is not a challenge and the relationship between households and
employment to improve the livelihoods and are likely to return after a while especially onset of older ages.
They migrate due to low economic opportunities they face in rural areas but they maintain the relationship with their families as in fact they still dependent on their families rather than forming new ties in the destination. Migrants maintain their ties through communicating and visiting their households when their get time and mostly during public holidays. However migration separate families as it involves the absence of a family member/s who is needed by the family while this absence also worth a lot to the household. Due to absence of other member/s such changes may occur in the household. For instance migrant member’s roles and responsibilities have to shift to available members of the household while other roles and responsibilities cannot be performed by any available in the household member/s but need only the migrant. As a result this disrupt family life and in that manner migration is perceived negatively on the household. It doesn’t treat families well that they are separated with their members.
On the other hand the satisfaction of the household’s basic needs through remittances, serve as an appreciation of migration. In consequence households become familiar with the loss of a member through migration and the member also become eliminated in household’s daily life. This means although migration brings income to the family but it is associated with social cost. Households have also adapted to live with these social cost since they understand the need that influenced their members to migrate and thus they benefit from migration of their members.